Lot’s Absence in Abraham’s Plea for Sodom and Gomorrah

In some source critical models, J, E, P, and D are relatively static texts, and the first three, at least, are unaware of each other. (It is generally agreed that D knew E, and many are convinced that the author of Deuteronomy 1-3(4), at least, if not the author of all of D, also knew J. Menachem Haran was a notable exception to this latter understanding. See discussion in Joel S. Baden, J, E, and the Redaction of the Pentateuch, FAT 68 [Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2009].) And yet, many scholars have noted that the documents seem to contain internal revisions, before they were combined, and that they are the product of scribal schools which developed them over time. I would add to this view, that these scribal schools appear to have come in contact with each other’s works, which explains some of the adaptations. That J made changes to its own text after encountering an early version of P is clear already from the addition of the flood story, as I wrote about in my “Noah’s Original Identity: The First Winemaker,” (TheTorah 2015), and the addition of Lot is another such example.  

The emphasis on the name Canaan in P is stark in comparison with J, which, in addition to mentioning specific sites that Abraham visits (Shechem, Bethel, etc.), just refers to “the land” in general.

The addition of YHWH’s Garden was likely because the use of Egypt as the beautiful land par excellence was offensive to the redactor, so he added something more amenable.

This repetitive phrase was likely added to connect the verse to the next one when Lot leaves Zoar, as an implied explanation that God was going to destroy that city too, or at least Lot believed God was.

Documentary scholars have long noted that verses can be moved to a different context, when keeping them in place would conflict with the thrust of the redacted story. For some (possible) examples of this, see David Frankel, “The Grain and Pomegranates of Mei Merivah (מי מריבה),” TheTorah (2015); idem, “Noah, Ham and the Curse of Canaan: Who Did What to Whom in the Tent?” TheTorah (2017); David Ben-Gad HaCohen, “Why Deuteronomy Has an Account of Aaron's Death in the Wrong Place,” TheTorah (2015).

The Jordan Plain is a large area, and much of it is still watery. Thus, when P references the destructing of the cities in this plain, it is likely envisioning the part of this region just north of the Dead Sea the Bible calls הַיְשִׁימוֹן “the Wasteland” (Num 23:28; 1 Sam 23:19, 24), within which can be found בֵּית הַיְשִׁימוֹת “Wasteland City” (Num 33:49; Josh 12:3, 13:20, Ezek 25:9), identified by some as Tell el-Athemeh. 

The story of Abram going down to Egypt is also a later addition, as is clear both from the resumptive repetition (Wiederaufnahme) between vv. 12:9 and 13:1, and from the secondary nature of the text as a rewrite of the Isaac and Rebecca in Gerar story. See discussion in Christoph Levin, “Abraham and Sarah in Egypt: A Story Composed to Prefigure the Exodus,” TheTorah (2020).

That some biblical texts believed that land was empty before Israel entered it was argued by Robert P. Carroll, “The Myth of the Empty Land,” Semeia 59 (1992): 79-93. See also, David Frankel, “The Song of the Sea and the History of Ancient Israel and Judah,” TheTorah (2015). I am suggesting that this myth is also part of the oldest J narrative. (The same suggestion was made by Casey Strine in a 2016 paper at SBL, titled “To Separate Peacefully: Reevaluating the Relationship between Gen 12 and Gen 13 Using the Social Scientific Study of Migration.”)